Note: I correct the given mistake only once. If you do not use the metric system, I will only make a single comment about it, even if it appears again in the rest of the article. If the draft has many language problems, I will only correct the most glaring ones.

Interview sessions are to be conducted by at least four (4) interviewers for a period of no more than three (3) hours each, and all sessions must be recorded.

While the number (#) notation was used a lot in the past, it's not something that really needs to be used unless there's a strong need for the number to be read accurately (drug dosages, for instance.) Otherwise it's just taking up space.

Requests by SCP-XXXX put to the Foundation must be cataloged immediately and reported for consideration.

Remove 'immediately' and specify to whom or which department it should be reported to.

To date, no direct contact with members of SCP-XXXX has been achieved, rather the Irish government acts as an intermediary between SCP-XXXX and the Foundation.

Can't we force them to somehow?

It is unknown precisely how many anomalous items are currently known, tracked, or contained by SCP-XXXX, but it is believed to be just over a hundred.

Seems mostly solid, though I personally feel like the description can be broken up into smaller paragraphs for ease and fluent-ness of reading. Currently, the wall-of-text effect happening can be overwhelming, and also makes it a bit harder to retain information when the chunks presented are so big. Fortunately, with the way your information is grouped, for most of your paragraphs just splitting them in half will work fine here.

I do think the containment's last sentence can be moved to the start, since it seems more directly related to the containment of SCP-XXXX. From there you can make the rest of the text a new paragraph, since the topics of "directly related to SCP-XXXX containment" and "interview policy" are already fairly distinct here.

The interview excerpts are set up a little confusingly. Why not put all the content pertaining to each interview in its own box, rather than having them be separated with text in between boxes?

Content-wise, I feel like it's a good premise; I'm all for stories about competent organizations that manage to retain their humanity/morals/respect-based system of beliefs. I think the only complaint there might be is again, the sheer amount of text presented in the paragraphs making it difficult for a reader to sift through and process. If the reader starts to forget things as they read, the good stuff gets lost in the shuffle, and the article feels bland as a result.

Okay, here we go. I got a PM requesting a read but I need to work tomorrow and it's late and my inbox is swamped again… here are my thoughts from a quick read:

I still feel like the paragraphs are a bit on the long side and you can do some trimming. For example:

SCP-XXXX is a department of the Irish government that carries out confidential research on anomalous phenomenon in the Republic of Ireland, referring to itself as the Department of Preservation. Currently, the Foundation has little information regarding the covert projects undertaken by SCP-XXXX, largely due to the fact the organisation refuses to communicate or cooperate with any other research group of its kind in the world. While bearing similarities to the Foundation in its effort to locate, track, and contain anomalous phenomenon, SCP-XXXX has been designated a threat due to its stringent policy of isolationism and treatment of potentially dangerous items.

Can be shortened to:

SCP-XXXX, referred to as the Department of Preservation, is a government department of the Republic of Ireland that carries out confidential research on anomalous phenomena. The organization refuses communication with any other research group; thus little information is known regarding the covert projects undertaken by SCP-XXXX. While similar to the Foundation in terms of operation, SCP-XXXX has been designated a threat due to its stringent policy of isolationism and difference in treatment of potentially dangerous items.

And so on. And general wording stuff like remembering that "phenomenon" is singular and "phenomena" is plural.

Somehow I don't quite remember SCP-XXXX-1 being present in the same way in the draft I read previously, but admittedly it is late and I am tired. I do feel like the interviews got a little draggy due to bureaucracy detail stuff, which I'm admittedly not too crazy about. I do like the ending still though.

Probably an upvote from me if you trim down the description a bit. Also, maybe ask some of our history buffs to check the Irish government bits?